1. Field Of The Invention
This invention relates to improved human hair anchoring means such as may be implanted in the scalp of a hair implant recipient, and more specifically it pertains to the preparation of a recipient's hair, or a donor's hair, with an artificial follicle which comprises a bulbous silicone elastomer coating and a follicle extension of silicone polymer coating.
2. Description Of The Prior Art
For years costly attempts have been made to provide a viable and lasting solution to the loss of human hair. Aside from the use of toupees and wigs, or the oftentimes more questionable use of ungents and hair restoratives, surgical implantation of hair, both human and artificial, has met with varying degrees of success. In many cases, the implanted hair, if human (some methods for its implantation are discussed hereinafter), is attacked at the derma interface by proteins that are present in the derma itself. Recent studies tend to show that this mechanism for the destruction of the hair shaft and the consequent loss of hair may be much akin to the natural process which causes the syndrome known as "male pattern baldness". Should the implant have been of artificial hair or comprise certain artificial anchoring means, the primary cause of subsequent loss has been infection because of rejection by the body's defensive mechanisms acting upon a foreign substance.
A recent patent search disclosed two documents which are relevant in light of the instant invention. The first of these is U.S. Pat. No. 4,517,997, issued to Forchetti in 1985. This patent teaches the coating of a human hair with a non-infectuous, nonbody-rejecting type of material to form an enlargement at the implantation end of the hair, an artificial follicle. The distinguishing characteristics between the Forchetti patent and the instant inventor's teachings are that Forchetti uses a natural hair that is broadened at the bottom to form a hair root or follicle-emulating terminous which is then coated with an inert material, in this case gold. In the instant invention, the first end-expanding coating is a silicone polymer. The second coating is a root-or follicle-defining coat of silicone elastomer that purposefully does not encompass the entire first coating or initial end-expanding coating. Most notable in the Forchetti teaching is the fact that the inert coating (gold) does not extend intentionally beyond the surface of the derma. The inventor is quite express in this particular facet in that he both teaches and claims an inert coating that covers an enlargement of the hair end and which is the outermost layer in the singular coating scheme. Thus, Forchetti teaches a coating of gold that must cover the entire enlarged portion of the hair.
Another relevant teaching is that of Mielzynski et al in the U.S. Pat. No. 3,003,155, which issued in October 1981. The crux of the Mielzynski teaching is basically a hair implantation dart. The dart is comprised of a polymethylmethacrylate, polyethylene, vitallium or suitable adventageous material having a body tissue compatability. Mielzynski et al do not actually teach a composition beyond the scope of those mentioned and, in 1961, the art was sorely lacking in a knowledge of what compositions had true body tissue "compatability". The basic notion of the Mielzynski et al art is to take a hair strand, whether it be a human hair or an artificial strand, and place it inside a dart, cementing it therein. When the hair is to be implanted, according to Mielzynski, in an artificial embedding material, it is just knotted generally at the end to form a ball and pressed into the artifical material. When it is to be pressed or inserted into the scalp (implantation), generally a dart having a nonretrograde motion means is employed. The nonretrograde motion means comprises either a triangular dart, a heart-shaped dart, or a harpoon head dart, i.e., one having a generally triangular shape with a series of axially spaced, concentric serrations thereon. When implanted according to the teachings of Mielzynski et al, the dart is placed into the derma and the hair protrudes therefrom, with a substantial amount of the hair shaft encircled by the derma. In this particular regard, the teachings of Mielzynski et al and Forchetti are the same. The greatest disadvantage of the latter, as well as the former art, is the likelihood that the body will reject either the anchor of Mielzynski et al (methymethacrylate or the other plastics); and, more than likely, the exposure of hair (if it is natural) to the proteins (both surface and interdermal), of the skin will attack the naked hair shaft as has been noted in studies by the instant inventor and others. Thus, in both of the aforementioned prior artform teachings, an artificial hair strand, like the artficial hair darts, is oftentimes rejected by the body's defensive mechanisms; while natural hair strands that are exposed to the proteins of the skin, are generally weakened or eroded to the extent that breakage or other forms of discontinuation (at the surface) of the skin becomes inevitable in a significant number of cases.
The instant invention avoids the shortcomings of the prior art and provides a hair strand implant with an artficial follicle that will sustain itself within the scalp by use of a truly body-compatible artificial follicle, as well as a mechanism for acquiring an invulnerability to the derma proteins.